Abstract
Background
Rhinoplasty is one of the most challenging esthetic operations. The ability to achieve precise and predictable changes in the shape and position of the nasal tip is still among the demanding areas of rhinoplasty. Tongue in groove (TIG) and columellar strut are two of the many techniques to ensure an adequate nasal tip projection and rotation; however, there is little evidence to support long-term efficacy of these techniques.
Methods
In a clinical trial, 80 cases who were rhinoplasty candidates were studied prospectively. They were randomly divided into two groups according to the use of columellar strut and TIG. The outcome measures were gaining and maintaining tip projection and rotation in the long term. Standardized photographs before and 6 and 12 months after the surgery were the measurements to compare the results between the two groups, which were evaluated for nasolabial angle and projection. Also, the patients’ satisfaction with beauty and nasal obstruction were assessed using the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale).
Results
Forty patients were operated using the columellar strut technique while the TIG method was used in 40 cases. Preoperatively, tip rotation, tip projection, and other characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. Postoperatively, the patients’ esthetic satisfaction was significantly greater in the TIG group 6 and 12 months after the surgery (P value = 0.001). The rest of the evaluated variables did not have any significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusions
It seems that both columellar strut and tongue in groove methods are effective techniques in maintaining tip projection and/or rotation in rhinoplasty. Using the tongue in groove technique in qualified hands may give significantly better esthetic satisfaction to patients than the columellar strut technique.
Level of evidence: Level I, therapeutic study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Rohrich RJ, Hoxworth RE, Kurkjian TJ (2012) The role of the columellar strut in rhinoplasty: indications and rationale. Plast Reconstr Surg 129(1):118e-25e
Rohrich RJ, Kurkjian TJ, Hoxworth RE, Stephan PJ, Mojallal A (2012) The effect of the columellar strut graft on nasal tip position in primary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(4):926–932
Beaty MM DW, Ii, Shawl MW (2002) The quantification of surgical changes in nasal tip support. Arch Facial Plast Surg 4(2):82–91
Akkus A, Eryilmaz E, Guneren E (2013) Comparison of the effects of columellar strut and septal extension grafts for tip support in rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 37(4):666–673
Margulis AHM (2007) Management of severe tip ptosis in closed rhinoplasty: the horizontal columellar strut. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 60(4):400–406
Bitik OUH, Kamburoğlu HO, Çaliş M, Zins JE (2015) Revisiting the role of columellar strut graft in primary open approach rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(4):987–997
Sadeghi M, Saedi B, Arvin Sazegar A, Amiri M (2009) The role of columellar struts to gain and maintain tip projection and rotation: a randomized blinded trial. Am J Rhinol 23(6):e47–e50
Guyuron B, Varghai A (2003) Lengthening the nose with a tongue-and-groove technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(4):1533–1539
Kridel RH, Scott BA, Foda HT (1999) The tongue-in-groove technique in septorhinoplasty: a 10-year experience. Arch Facial Plast Surg 1(4):246–56
Petroff MA, McCollough E, Hom D, Anderson JR (1991) Nasal tip projection: quantitative changes following rhinoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol 117(7):783–8
Seyhan A, Ozden S, Ozaslan U, Sir E (2007) A simplified use of septal extension graft to control nasal tip location. Aesthetic Plast Surg 31(5):506–511
Dobratz EJTV, Hilger PA (2010) Comparison of techniques used to support the nasal tip and their long-term effects on tip position. Arch Facial Plast Surg 12(3):172–179
Ponsky DC, Harvey DJ, Khan SW, Guyuron B (2010) Nose elongation: a review and description of the septal extension tongue-and-groove technique. Aesthet Surg J 30(3):335–46
Lohuis PJ, Datema FR (2015) Patient satisfaction in Caucasian and Mediterranean open rhinoplasty using the tongue-in-groove technique: prospective statistical analysis of change in subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance following aesthetic rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 125(4):831–836
Karaiskakis P, Bromba M, Dietz A, Sand M, Dacho A (2016) Reconstruction of nasal tip support in primary, open approach septorhinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273(9):2555–2560
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
The protocol of this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Tehran University of Medical Sciences.
Conflict of interest
Razie Yaberi, Amin Amali, Hamed Emami, and Babak Saedi declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Patient consent
Patients provided written consent before their inclusion in this study. Additional consent was obtained for the use of their images.
Funding
The authors received no funding for this study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yaberi, R., Amali, A., Emami, H. et al. A comparison of the tongue-in-groove and columellar strut in creating and maintaining tip projection and rotation: a randomized single blind trial. Eur J Plast Surg 41, 293–298 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-017-1346-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-017-1346-3